We are confident that when the court decides the merits of the case, it will instruct USFWS to ensure that the Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge is fully protected from such poorly-designed experiments.

Jane Davenport, senior attorney at Defenders of Wildlife
Chapel Hill, NC

As a result of a lawsuit filed by SELC on behalf of Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club last month, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agreed to halt its plans to turn Lake Mattamuskeet—the 40,000-acre centerpiece of an iconic migratory bird sanctuary—into a testing ground this summer for a chemical that is toxic to birds.

Plans were previously underway for the toxic algaecide experiment to start at Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge this summer and run through the end of October, before resuming again in April 2025, prompting the conservation groups to ask the court to issue a preliminary injunction to block the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from allowing the algaecide experiment.  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requires the product to carry a label warning it is toxic to birds. Following a hearing on the request in federal court in Raleigh, the Fish and Wildlife Service voluntarily agreed to freeze its plans to move forward with the project in Lake Mattamuskeet, which is located in eastern North Carolina.

“This agreement ensures that Lake Mattamuskeet and the birds that pass through it on their migratory paths will be kept safe from dangerous experiments with toxic chemicals — for now,” said Jane Davenport, senior attorney at Defenders of Wildlife. “We are confident that when the court decides the merits of the case that it will instruct Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure that the Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge is fully protected from such poorly-designed experiments, as the law requires.”

“This is a great day for everyone who values Lake Mattamuskeet and all of the geese, swans, ducks and hundreds of other birds that gather at the wildlife sanctuary,” said Ramona McGee, senior attorney and leader of the Wildlife Program at the Southern Environmental Law Center which represents the groups in court. “We’re all so relieved that these birds will not be exposed to toxic chemicals this year while the court reviews the legal problems with the Fish and Wildlife Service’s rushed and inadequate approval of this dangerous experiment.”

FWS has now agreed that it will not proceed with the experiment this year. Instead, the parties will try to resolve the merits of the lawsuit through litigation and hope that a final decision will be reached before the April 2025 restart date. Late Tuesday, the court entered an order confirming the agreement and setting the schedule for briefing the case.

A plan is already underway to improve water quality and reduce algae blooms in the lake, but after North Carolina’s General Assembly appropriated millions of North Carolina taxpayer dollars to test the algaecide, the Fish and Wildlife Service approved its use in Lake Mattamuskeet, even though the chemical can kill birds and corrode their beaks. In recent years, the Florida legislature has spent millions applying this product to several lakes and rivers, where it has failed to provide a lasting solution to harmful algal blooms that keep people from using the water.

“We’re glad that common sense has prevailed and provided more time to scrutinize this flawed plan,” said Erin Carey, acting director of the N.C. Sierra Club. “We hope that closer review will prove that there’s no defensible reason why an algaecide that’s toxic to birds should be tested at one of this region’s most important bird sanctuaries.”

Last month, the Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife, represented by the Southern Environmental Law Center, filed a federal lawsuit in the Eastern District of North Carolina challenging violations of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. The conservation groups represented by SELC are asking the court to block the plan until the Fish and Wildlife Service conducts a full analysis that protects the mission and purpose of the wildlife refuge and takes a hard look at the toxic algaecide’s harms and the available alternatives.

For over 75 years, Defenders of Wildlife has remained dedicated to protecting all native animals and plants in their natural communities. With a nationwide network of nearly 2.1 million members and activists, Defenders of Wildlife is a leading advocate for innovative solutions to safeguard our wildlife for generations to come. To learn more, please visit https://defenders.org/newsroom or follow us on X @Defenders.

  

Media Contact

Communications Director
mdewane@defenders.org
(202) 772-0217
Communications Specialist
jpetrequin@defenders.org
(202) 772-0243

Related

News

Image
Blackfeet Nation Birch Creek - hay bails in foreground
Washington, DC

Defenders Supports New Bill Expanding Investments in Soil Health and Wildlife Habitat on Private Land

Defenders of Wildlife today announced its support for H.R. 8754 introduced by Rep. Julia Brownley (D-CA). If passed, the Saving Our Interconnected Lives (SOIL) Act will amend the Farm Bill to encourage agricultural producers to voluntarily conserve soil and wildlife habitat on their land by prioritizing applications for projects that would address both concerns under the Department of Agriculture’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP).
Image
2010.12.27 - Florida Manatee - Crystal River National Wildlife Refuge - Florida - Keith Ramos - USFWS
Washington, DC

Defenders Opposes “Breathtakingly Awful” Attempt to Gut Endangered Species Act with Appalling Rewrite

Defenders of Wildlife opposes one of the worst-ever attempts to gut the Endangered Species Act, the “ESA Amendments Act of 2024.” Sponsored by Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-AR) chair of the U.S. House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee, the draft bill being heard today in the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries demolishes many of the core tenets of the landmark conservation bill, warps its foundational reliance on best available science and increases the potential for political interference.